4 ms·

What makes you say that? Wasn't myocarditis mostly a problem for young men for example? Narcolepsy from the H1N1 vaccine was similar, you needed very specific g

What makes you say that? Wasn't myocarditis mostly a problem for young men for example? Narcolepsy from the H1N1 vaccine was similar, you needed very specific genetics to get it. The body is complex.

bamboozled 2y ago
"The body is complex" Yet here you are on hacker news pretending that you understand it without giving any evidence to backup your assumptions.
- worksonmine 2y ago
  They are not assumptions and I'm not here to publish a paper. I'm asking for clarification on a statement. Are you also trying to tell me genetics, lifestyle and basically any difference we humans have can't affect side-effects? What data do you have for that ridiculous claim?
- _heimdall 2y ago
  You raise this as if there isn't a plethora of evidence pointing to an increased risk of myocarditis in men under 40 receiving at least one Covid vaccine. There's plant of confusing data out there on both sides of the Covid debate, but this isn't one of them. https://newsroom.heart.org/news/myocarditis-risk-significantly-higher-after-covid-19-infection-vs-after-a-covid-19-vaccine https://newsroom.heart.org/news/myocarditis-risk-significant...
  - bamboozled 2y ago
    "Myocarditis risk significantly higher after COVID-19 infection vs. after a COVID-19 vaccine" I hope you realize this is the title of the link you posted? Among nearly 43 million people in England, ages 13 and older, who received at least one dose and up to 3 doses of a COVID-19 vaccine, fewer than 3,000 people (0.007%) were hospitalized or died with myocarditis, inflammation of the heart muscle, during the study period of December 1, 2020 through December 15, 2021. So in other words, you're going to get Covid19 anyway, which means you might get myocarditis, yet getting the vaccines means you will get less sick overall, so statistically speaking, the vaccine is the smarter choice. I can't believe we're still talking about this. Your risk of getting sick is far lower than it is driving to the store, why not advocate for banning cars?
    - _heimdall 2y ago
      My point, though, wasn't comparing risks with and without the vaccine. I user it only as a very recent example of potential vaccine injury being focused in a subset of the population rather than being evenly distributed. Why do you assume that my simply raising covid or what was found to be a still comparatively small chance of myocarditis as starting some larger debate? I purposely tried to be very targeted both in the stat I reached for and how I raised it to avoid starting some larger, and unnecessary, covid debate.

What makes you say that? Wasn't myocarditis mostly a problem for young men for example? Narcolepsy from the H1N1 vaccine was similar, you needed very specific genetics to get it. The body is complex.

bamboozled 2y ago

"The body is complex" Yet here you are on hacker news pretending that you understand it without giving any evidence to backup your assumptions.

worksonmine 2y ago
They are not assumptions and I'm not here to publish a paper. I'm asking for clarification on a statement. Are you also trying to tell me genetics, lifestyle and basically any difference we humans have can't affect side-effects? What data do you have for that ridiculous claim?
_heimdall 2y ago
You raise this as if there isn't a plethora of evidence pointing to an increased risk of myocarditis in men under 40 receiving at least one Covid vaccine. There's plant of confusing data out there on both sides of the Covid debate, but this isn't one of them. https://newsroom.heart.org/news/myocarditis-risk-significantly-higher-after-covid-19-infection-vs-after-a-covid-19-vaccine https://newsroom.heart.org/news/myocarditis-risk-significant...
- bamboozled 2y ago
  "Myocarditis risk significantly higher after COVID-19 infection vs. after a COVID-19 vaccine" I hope you realize this is the title of the link you posted? Among nearly 43 million people in England, ages 13 and older, who received at least one dose and up to 3 doses of a COVID-19 vaccine, fewer than 3,000 people (0.007%) were hospitalized or died with myocarditis, inflammation of the heart muscle, during the study period of December 1, 2020 through December 15, 2021. So in other words, you're going to get Covid19 anyway, which means you might get myocarditis, yet getting the vaccines means you will get less sick overall, so statistically speaking, the vaccine is the smarter choice. I can't believe we're still talking about this. Your risk of getting sick is far lower than it is driving to the store, why not advocate for banning cars?
  - _heimdall 2y ago
    My point, though, wasn't comparing risks with and without the vaccine. I user it only as a very recent example of potential vaccine injury being focused in a subset of the population rather than being evenly distributed. Why do you assume that my simply raising covid or what was found to be a still comparatively small chance of myocarditis as starting some larger debate? I purposely tried to be very targeted both in the stat I reached for and how I raised it to avoid starting some larger, and unnecessary, covid debate.